mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Science & Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-07-01, 14:47   #56
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across

254208 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diep View Post
Dumb people are not capable of grasping concepts outside their confort zone. Science is overloaded with such persons who qualify on paper but in reality do not grasp the whole picture when it doesn't fit in that corner where they work.
Some people, dumb or otherwise, spout off in public on issues they know little about and fail to perform even simple consistency checks on their output.

We have already pointed out that people went further than the ISS long before that facility was constructed. I showed that your cost estimates are at least a factor of four too large and could well be wrong by an order of magnitude.

Why should we take your other claims seriously?

IMO, to start taking you seriously you should re-write your article after careful examination of your sources and to provide references where appropriate. Others in this thread have already done part of your work for you.

Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 2021-07-01 at 15:37 Reason: insert missing space
xilman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-01, 15:39   #57
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

120008 Posts
Default

This recent post is a followup to one of Diep's 3-year-old claims about another space mission

Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-01, 16:05   #58
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

210×5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
Lunar dust is far sharper. The wind on Mars allows the grains to hit each other and knock the edges off.
OK, and what happens to the sharp bits that are knocked off? If they don't retain their sharpness, why not? One obvious consequence would be, smaller dust particles.

Since the Moon has so little atmosphere, most of its dust was formed by meteor impacts, and perhaps earlier volcanism and thermal stress.

Mars has had plenty of meteor impacts, but the dust formed by them has, as you say, been blown around and smoothed. It occurs to me that additional dust might have been formed by wind erosion, a mechanism not present on the Moon. Dust formed by wind erosion might have different properties than dust formed by meteor impacts.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-01, 19:08   #59
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

1010510 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
OK, and what happens to the sharp bits that are knocked off? If they don't retain their sharpness, why not? One obvious consequence would be, smaller dust particles.
If you had one of theses as a kid, you might know. https://www.harborfreight.com/dual-d...ler-67632.html
Yes, water is usually added, the water does not do the work itself.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-01, 20:51   #60
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
"Jacob"
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

1,753 Posts
Default

IMHO Diep looses himself in too much detail. Obviously, this leads him to inconstencies and other errors.

As I understood him, he is trying to argue that earth can't afford, at this time, the cost and time needed to bootstrap, not a colony because that implies a dependency, but an autonomous and viable place outside of earth, in other words there are more pressing needs. His other argument is that robotic exploration is more efficient (I would add as a precaution ”at this moment”)

The ”backup” counter argument is valid though, but only as far as it concerns the survival of human (generated) civilisation(s) after a catastrophe destroys it/them on earth. So often it is used as a solution to the depletion or resources due an unsustainable usage of current earth resources. That argument is ignoring the consequences of exponential growth.

IMHO, again ! A lot of the posts were too emotional, I suppose that is why some even beame explicitely insulting.

Communication is difficult [no parse];-)[/no parse]

Jacob
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-01, 22:42   #61
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

5·43·47 Posts
Default

There has been a 3D printer in space for a while.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/s...t-applications
So many of the problems that diep sees have been addressed either in part or completely. There is a reason that Musk's companies include a solar power company, an electric vehicle company (that is making off road capable vehicles that have seal cabins), a company that is developing tunnel boring technology (that can be shipped to Mars on a single Starship, and a company that is look to low atmospheric pressure transport. These things are getting perfected here.

Bolts are a technology that is not needed in many areas that attachment is needed. The cam system that comes with many Ikea items can be cast very cheaply. For the moon, regolith can be piled up and sintered in place with microwaves. Mars has similar options. Put a blade on the front of your rover and you have a small bulldozer to make a road and can bury your hab. For most of the day a person could be outside in a rover with a cab and in space suits. Being in a covered hab while only be required part of the time.

Latency of rover ops is a minor inconvenience on the Moon's frontside and manageable on the backside. But at Mars there is no "joysticking" of the rovers. Delays of 20 minutes do not allow for reactionary commands. It must be preprogrammed, goal based smart commands, or a mix. Those and the required testing of commands allows for cycles of about 1 per day. The need to handle data and commands via the DSN also adds issues. A person in Mars orbit could get vastly more (maybe 10x) done by joysticking the same rover. A person on the surface can get even more done. People are very general purpose. As was shown on the moon, training 'throttle jockeys' in geology brought great benefit. They still could fly the CSM and the LM, drive the rover, fix things that broke (like reprogramming the computer on Apollo 14), and do geological work. While Neil Armstrong was not as well trained in geology as the Apollo 15-17 crews, his insight to shovel in a bunch of 'soil' into the sample box brought huge benefits in understanding the moon. It was not a preplanned thing. The volume was massive compared to the smaller samples that carefully collected. That is a smart person (pilot or not) on site.

And Gemini had missions higher than the ISS. As did the Shuttle. Diep is ignorant of basic space history.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-03, 19:57   #62
wblipp
 
wblipp's Avatar
 
"William"
May 2003
New Haven

1001010000012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diep View Post
You want to pay 10 trillion dollar for a settlement on Mars and pay each 20 years again
....
A single crew of a handful of men cannot carry out all tasks needed
...
It's a waste of cash to ship humans trying just sitting underground operating remote robots what you can do from planet earth to using autonomeous robots.
Your arguments made sense 30 years ago. But there has been a paradigm shift.

Your arguments work in a world where space activities are done by governments funded by tax dollars and support is at the whim of the voters. Your question of "You want to pay ..." makes sense if I am paying through my tax dollars. Your assumption of "a handful of men" makes sense in a world where voters would have the power to limit expenses. Your assumption that the entire reason for going is to gather scientific information makes sense in a world where governments must justify the expenditures to voters.

But the privatization of space is changing the arguments in ways that are just beginning to unfold. People laughed at SpaceX - the head of the European Space Agency explained that reusable rockets made no sense because he wouldn't have enough work to keep factory workers employed. That argument made sense when only governments did space, and a jobs program was integral to selling it to the voters. But SpaceX now routinely reuses their first stage and the cost of launching a satellite has dropped by over an order of magnitude.

Yes, a handful of men on Mars is unsustainable. Elon Musk envisions thousands of missions over decades with a hundred people per mission, creating a self sufficient population of a million people on Mars in 40 or 50 years. Done with internal financing from launches, space based internet, Earth travel in under an hour, and more to be discovered as the implications of these things become known.

Your thinking is inside the box of what could governments do - but outside that box is becoming reality.
wblipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-04, 00:29   #63
kriesel
 
kriesel's Avatar
 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

2·11·269 Posts
Default

The pessimists are sometimes proven wrong https://www.xaprb.com/blog/flight-is-impossible/
by those with a sound plan https://biblehub.com/luke/14-28.htm
kriesel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-05, 02:34   #64
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009

1,987 Posts
Default

A manned trip to Mars. My first question would be in what? If I am not mistaken, Orion can hold six. Put six in it and send it to Mars and the crew might be at each other's throats in a few weeks. Solution: Four would sleep for the duration.

Another solution might be for Orion to dock with some kind of large habitat module in orbit and take it with them. People need their space. Such a module would need to be assembled in orbit. The shuttles are gone, so how do the parts and pieces get into space? Artemis could be converted into a cargo carrier as needed. An entirely new design of the upper section would be requited. The issues multiply.

We do not have the infrastructure to do this, yet. Perhaps in a decade we will, but not now. NASA is hoping for Mars, but back to the moon is the current reality...
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-05, 02:47   #65
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

5×43×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
A manned trip to Mars. My first question would be in what?
There is one answer here: https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...5&postcount=14
Also the volume of a Space-X Starship with maybe 25 people would be ok.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-05, 03:20   #66
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

10100001110112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
Solution: Four would sleep for the duration.
I think you've been watching too many sci-fi stuff.
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Manned Aerial Vehicle Multirotor Super Drone Mark Rose Lounge 2 2015-09-05 04:31
Mission Creep davieddy PrimeNet 14 2011-12-10 20:55
To the moon and Mars... kwstone Soap Box 22 2005-07-25 12:07
Off-Topic: "Mission to Mars" ewmayer Lounge 7 2004-05-25 18:48
First mission GP2 Completed Missions 2 2003-09-28 23:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:25.


Tue Nov 30 12:25:09 UTC 2021 up 130 days, 6:54, 0 users, load averages: 0.85, 1.04, 1.02

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.